††††††††††††††† Part Two of the ALISE statistical questionnaire requested
schools to provide data dealing with student enrollment and characteristics,
class size, degrees awarded, financial aid, and tuition and fees.† This part of the questionnaire collected primarily
aggregated data reported on 11 data input tables.† These data input tables were used to generate
the tables that constitute the core of this chapter.

††††††††††† In
working with the data reported by the schools, some incomplete or
inconsistent data were encountered.†
In a few cases, schools recognized errors soon after mailing
the data and revised figures were submitted.†
In the later stages of data entry and analysis, schools were
contacted by email, fax and phone to resolve what appeared to be either
inconsistencies or reporting errors.† In some cases, data requested were not in the
possession of schools (this is particularly true for the program categories
ďOther UndergraduateĒ and ďOther GraduateĒ) or the schools elected
not to provide the requested data for a variety of reasons.† As a result, row totals in some tables are greater than the separate
counts of cells in that row and for the total of a column.† Footnotes have been provided whenever possible
to explain inconsistencies.† Although
no guarantee can be made that all errors have been identified and
corrected, it is believed that the accuracy of the data reported by
the schools as reflected in the tables that follow is high.

††††††††††† All
56 schools participated in the survey (7 Canadian and 49 US).† Because data for similar data elements, e.g.,
enrollment by program level, international student enrollment, etc.,
were submitted by schools on separate tables, it is possible that
some subtotals and totals may vary slightly from table to table due
to differences in data supplied.†
To minimize this problem every effort has been made to make
these data agree, but it is recognized inconsistencies have not been
totally removed from the tables.† In a few cases, editorial changes were made
to tables to obtain agreement among them.†
These editorial changes have been footnoted.† This inconsistency should not cause major problems in that the numbers
usually vary only slightly.

††††††††††† In
all but a few instances, all schools that reported enrollment for
a specific program level are included in all tables for that program
level regardless of whether data were reported.†
In those situations where data were not reported, a footnote
to the table has been used to indicate the schools with enrollment
not reporting data.† Also, footnotes have been supplied indicating
schools not included in totals and means.† Schools which offer a particular program that had no enrollment
in that program this year are not included in any tables for that
program level.

††††††††††† All
data submitted by the schools are represented in the relevant tables
unless the data were clearly inconsistent with the data requested.† In these latter cases, a footnote is provided
explaining the situation and giving the data reported by the school.†
A dash ď-----Ē has been used throughout this chapter to indicate
no response.† In a number of cases no data were reported by a school when a ď0Ē
would have been the more appropriate response, conversely; in other
situations a ď0Ē was reported when no input would have been appropriate.† In preparing the tables, the context of the
data to be reported was evaluated against the data schools submitted
and, in some cases, zeros were changed to ď-----ď and ď-----ď changed
to zeros.

††††††††††† Consideration
has been given to the meaning conveyed by the numbers in the tables.† Totals for rows and columns were calculated
and checked against the totals provided by the schools.† When a discrepancy was encountered, the schoolís
representative was contacted to try to resolve the difference.† In a number of cases the total number of schools
reporting will be different from the number used to calculate the
mean.† For example, if it is
known that not all schools provided ethnic data, then in calculating
the mean for any ethnic group, the number of students in any particular
ethnic category was divided by the number of schools reporting ethnic
data rather than dividing by all 56 schools.†
When totals and means are calculated, the number of schools
included in the calculation is stated, and a footnote is provided
indicating which schools were excluded, or in some cases included.

††††††††††† In
order to make data in the tables understandable, particularly when
a school felt the need to explain data that might differ slightly
from the data requested, footnotes have been provided liberally with
the tables.† Additionally, some general comments have been
made at the beginning of a section of tables if those comments are
pertinent to all tables in that section.

Enrollment by Program and Gender†
(Table II-1)

††††††††††† Enrollment figures for the 2000 Fall term were
requested for each of eight program levels:

∑
Bachelorís

∑
ALA-Accredited Masterís -- Library Science

∑
ALA-Accredited Masterís -- Information Science

∑
Other Masterís

∑
Post-Masterís

∑
Doctoral

∑
Other Graduate

∑
Other Undergraduate

To ensure that each school interpreted the program
levels the same way the following program definitions and instructions
for their use were provided:

Bachelor's:† Include here only those students who are working
toward a bachelor's degree in library and information science, regardless
of whether offered on or off campus.† Do not include students taking courses as cognate or service courses.†
Report them as ďOther Undergraduate.Ē

ALA-Accredited
Master's -- Library Science:†
Include here only those students working towards a separate
master's degree in library science or a combined library and information
science degree accredited by ALA, regardless of whether offered on
or off campus. Do not include students taking courses as cognate or
service courses.† Report them as ďOther Graduate.Ē

ALA-Accredited
Master's -- Information Science:†
Include here only those students working towards a separate
master's degree in information science accredited by ALA, regardless
of whether offered on or off campus. Students workings towards an
information science degree not accredited by ALA should be reported
as ďOther Masterís.Ē† Do not include students taking courses as cognate
or service courses.† Report
them as ďOther Graduate.Ē

Other
Masterís:† Include here
those students working towards a master's degree not accredited by
ALA offered by the school, regardless of whether offered on or off
campus.† Do not include students taking courses as cognate
or service courses.† Report
them as ďOther Graduate.Ē

Post-Master's:† Include here only those students who are working
toward a post-master's degree or certificate in library and information
science, regardless of whether offered on or off campus.† Do not include students taking courses as cognate
or service courses.† Report
them as ďOther Graduate.Ē

Doctoral:† Include here only those students who are working
toward a doctoral degree in library and information science, regardless
of whether offered on or off campus. Do not include students taking
courses as cognate or service courses.†
Report them as ďOther Graduate.Ē

Other
Graduate:† Include here
students taking library and information science courses as cognate
or service courses or for professional development, regardless of
whether offered on or off campus.

Other
Undergraduate:† Include
here students taking library and information science courses as cognate
or service courses for undergraduate credit, regardless of whether
offered on or off campus.† Do
not include students who are in an established undergraduate program
in library and information science.

††††††††††† Although
the questionnaire was designed to collect data separately for ALA-accredited
master's in library science and ALA-accredited master's in information
science degrees, only two schools provided data that could be used.† Several schools did report data for ALA-accredited
master's -- information science, but these data submissions were invalidated
when it was determined that, although these schools had masterís level
information science degree programs, those programs did not have ALA
accreditation.† These data
are reported under the ďother masterísĒ category.†
With only two schools reporting for the accredited IS master's
category, in the interest of simplicity of reporting, all ALA-accredited
master's data, whether LS or IS,†
were reported under "ALA Accredited Master's" rather
than differentiated.† In subsequent sections of the report, mention
will be made of data being requested for five degree levels in order
to have that statement agree with the tables that follow, although
in reality data for six degree levels had been sought originally.

††††††††††† Schools
were requested to provide separate counts for full-time and part-time
students, differentiated by gender.†
For part-time students, FTE (Full Time Equivalent) figures
were also requested as well as the total FTE enrollment.†
The directions instructed each school to use its institutionís
method for computation of FTE or, if no such method existed, to use
the following formula:

Consider a student
full-time if the course load will enable requirements for the degree
to be completed within the normal length of time.†
For example, if the normal time to complete the degree is 12
courses in 4 quarters, a student carrying 3 courses during the quarter
should be counted as 1.00 FTE; a student carrying 2 courses during
the quarter should be counted as 0.67 FTE (2/3 = .067).†
Students carrying an overload should be counted as only 1.00
FTE.

Although on-campus and off-campus
students were to be included in the data submitted, the questionnaire
also asked for separate FTE data for off-campus students.

††††††††††† Table II-1-a-1 is a summary
table that presents total enrollment figures for Fall 2000 as well
as the number and percentage of full-time and part-time students,
divided by gender, for each of the seven program levels.†
The total enrollment of 21,040 is up 12.5 percent from the
18,699 reported last year.† Total
enrollment for the 5 degree programs was 17,759.†
ALA-accredited masterís programs account for the majority (62.3
percent) of total enrollment.† Students
in ďother masterísĒ degree programs constitute 6.4 percent of total
enrollment.† Bachelorís degree programs continue to rise
in the percentage their students constitute of total enrollment Ė
11.1 percent this year.† The
29 schools offering a doctoral degree report enrollment for those
programs of 733 or 3.5 percent of total enrollment.†
Post-masterís students comprise less than 1.1 percent of total
enrollment.

††††††††††† All
degree levels, except bachelorís and doctoral degrees, have the majority
of their students in a part-time status.†
At the bachelorís degree level, 80.6 percent of the students
are full-time.† Doctoral programs,
which last year had a near even distribution of full-time to part-time
students (49.9 vs. 50.1 respectively), this year had that distribution
reversed with 51 percent full-time.†
More than two-thirds of all ALA-accredited masterís (68.5 percent)
and ďother masterísĒ (68.6 percent) degree students are in a part-time
status.

††††††††††† When
distribution by gender is examined, female students are found to comprise
over three-quarters (79 percent) of ALA-accredited masterís enrollment.† Gender distribution becomes more even for students
in ďother masterísĒ degree programs with 51.1 percent male enrollment.† At the doctoral level female students continue
in the majority (56.5 percent).

††††††††††† Thirteen
of the 56 schools (23.2 percent) currently offer a bachelorís degree.† Table II-1-c-1a provides school-by-school enrollment
figures.† It shows that of
the 2,330 students pursuing a bachelorís degree in Fall 2000, 78 percent
of these students are enrolled at one of two schools:† Drexel (720), and Syracuse (613).† Their enrollments comprise 50 percent of all bachelorís degree enrollments.†
The four schools with the highest enrollments for the bachelor's
degree are Drexel, Syracuse, Florida State (297), and Pittsburgh (270).†
They account for 79.7 percent of all enrollments at this level.† While a large percentage, this figure is down
from the 89.2 percent of enrollment these programs constituted last
year.† This change is due to
increasing enrollments at most other schools and the addition of two
new bachelorís degree programs at Dalhousie and Washington.

††††††††††† Table II-1-c-2a reports
ALA-accredited masterís enrollment for each school.† It illustrates the wide range of program sizes
across the 56 schools Ė from the five largest programs, San Jose (640),
Dominican (546), Kent State (504), Simmons (497), and Indiana (453)
to the three schools with 70 or fewer students: Southern Mississippi
(70), Clark Atlanta (67), and Iowa (64).†
Ten schools have ALA-accredited masterís enrollment of less
than 100 students.

††††††††††† The
distribution of full-time to part-time students reported in this table
also shows wide variation among the schools.†
Five schools (8.9 percent) have more than three-fourths of
their ALA-accredited masterís students in a full-time status:† (Montrťal (86.2), McGill (82.4), North Carolina
Ė Chapel Hill (80.1), Michigan (77.1), and California Ė Los Angeles
(76).† One other school approaches
that level:† Dalhousie (74).† It is of note that all six schools with the
highest percentage of full-time enrollment have two-year masterís
programs, although they do not represent all schools with two-year
programs.

††††††††††† Seventeen
schools (30.4 percent) have 80 percent or more of their ALA-accredited
master's enrollment as part-time.†
The schools with the highest percentages of part-time enrollment
are Queens, (96.4), Long Island (96.1), North Carolina Ė Greensboro
(93.1), and Syracuse (91.5).

††††††††††† The variation in full-time versus part-time enrollment can
have a considerable impact on a schoolís enrollment figures when enrollment
is viewed in terms of FTE (Full-Time Equivalent).† From that perspective who the largest schools are changes noticeably.†
The programs with the largest ALA-accredited master's enrollment
in terms of FTE are Indiana (329.4), Kent State (323.2), and Florida
State (310.5).† The five smallest
programs in terms of FTE enrollment are Arizona (48.9), Southern Mississippi
(48.1), Clark Atlanta (47), St. Johnís (40.5), and Iowa (39.5). †Ten
schools (17.9 percent) have an ALA-accredited masterís FTE enrollment
of under 75 students.

††††††††††† Fourteen schools reported enrollment for ďother masterísĒ
degrees (Table II-1-c-3a) for
Fall 2000 in addition to their ALA-accredited masterís enrollment.† The mean enrollment of 95.9 students is skewed by the large enrollments
at three schools: (Drexel (379), Pittsburgh (336), and Syracuse (202).†
The enrollments at these three schools constitute 68.3 percent
of all ďother masterísĒ enrollment.† Except for North Texas (115) and Missouri (100),
no other schools have enrollments of 100 or more students for this
degree.

††††††††††† Post-masterís programs historically have had comparatively
low enrollments.† Table II-1-c-4a confirms
that this continues.† Of the
28 schools reporting Fall 2000 enrollment data for† their† post-masterís program
only five, (Syracuse (84), South Carolina (31), Southern Connecticut
(18), Florida State (17), and Missouri (16), had more than 10 students
in their programs.† The high
percentage of part-time students in post-masterís programs (85.3 percent)
results in a low mean FTE (4.5) (Table
II-1-c-4b).

††††††††††† More than half (29, 51.8 percent) of the 56 schools offer
a doctoral program (Table II-1-c-5a).† The 733 doctoral students enrolled in these
programs in Fall 2000† are
distributed quite unevenly across schools.†
The doctoral program at Pittsburgh is by far the largest (74
students) followed by North Texas (61).†
No other school has more than 50 doctoral students.†
Nearly half the schools (13) have enrollments of fewer than
20 students.† Although this distribution of full-time vs.
part-time doctoral students is virtually identical (51 to 49 percent
respectively), this distribution varies widely from school to school.† Indeed, a few schools report all their doctoral
enrollment as full-time.† This
distribution can be easily skewed by schools with only a few doctoral
students.† Limiting a examination
to those schools enrollments of more than 7 doctoral students reveals
that Maryland, McGill, Michigan, and Toronto have doctoral programs
have exclusively full-time students.†
For other schools the reverse is true.†
For example, Long Island, Simmons and Wisconsin Ė Milwaukee
report 100 percent of their doctoral enrollments are part-time students.

††††††††††† Table
II-1-e provides the number of FTE off-campus students each ALA
school had registered for the 2000 Fall term.†
Nearly two-thirds (36) of the schools had off-campus enrollment
with several schools having very sizable off-campus enrollment.† By far the largest off-campus program resides
at Florida State† (234.6 FTE).†
Six other schools have FTE enrollments exceeding 100 students:†
South Carolina (183.3), Emporia (152), Missouri (145.3), North
Carolina Ė Greensboro (127), North Texas (126.8), and Southern Connecticut
(102.7).† Nine schools had off-campus enrollment of ten
or fewer FTE students.† Twenty
schools reported they had no off-campus students or elected not to
report these data.† The total
FTE off-campus enrollment of 1,917.6 represents an increase of 14.1
percent.† This follows upon a 4.2 percent increase in Fall 1999 and 11.1 percent
in Fall 1998.† Clearly there
is a trend, at least among a sizeable subset of schools toward off-campus
instruction.† When a mean enrollment
is calculated limited to those schools with off-campus enrollment(36), the mean enrollment is
58.2 FTE students.

Course Enrollments† (Table II-2)

††††††††††† Schools were requested to report the number of students enrolled in courses
or sections of courses during the 2000 Fall term.† Enrollments were reported in increments of
five students.† Independent
study and reading courses were not be included in these counts.

††††††††††† Table II-2-a-1 reports
course and section enrollment distributed across the 11 enrollment
groups for courses offered in Fall 2000 by each ALA school.†
The number of courses offered that term ranged from 9 (Dalhousie)
to 88 (Syracuse) with a mean of 40.3 courses offered per school.† Nine schools (16.1 percent) offered fewer than
20 courses that term.† That
is up from the five schools which offered courses at that level in
Fall 1999.† At the other end of the spectrum, seventeen
schools (28.8 percent) offered more than 50 courses in Fall 2000 compared
to 12 schools at that level in Fall 1999.

††††††††††† The
majority of courses offered in schools have enrollments of 6-10, 11-15,
16-20 and 21-25 students.† These
four course enrollment groups account for 59.8 percent of all courses
offered.† The most frequent course size was 6-10 students.†
The total number of courses offered with large enrollments,
i.e., 36-40, 41-45 and 46-50 students, was relatively small (95, 59,
and 31 respectively) when compared to the frequencies of other enrollment
groups.† It should be noted,
however, that the number of courses offered with these higher enrollments
increased by 25 percent from the figures for Fall 1999.† Despite this increase, courses offered in these
three larger enrollment groups accounted for only 8.2 percent of all
courses offered.† The number
of courses offered with more than 50 students in Fall 2000 , 66, is
also an increase over the 57 courses at this level reported for Fall
1999 and Fall 1998.† The questionnaire requested schools to comment
on courses with enrollments over 50 students.† From these comments (Table II-2-a-2),
it is apparent that courses with enrollments over 50 students continue
to be used primarily to present core material, distance education
or undergraduate courses.

††††††††††† Schools
were asked not to include independent studies or individual reading
courses in their submission of course enrollment data.†
Rather they were requested to report separately the total number
of students enrolled in those courses.†
Table II-2-a-3 shows the
number of independent study or reading courses reported by each ALA
school.† This table reveals
the wide variation in the number offered from none at British Columbia,
Clark Atlanta, Montrťal, Puerto Rico , and Texas to 170 at Florida
State and 106 at Syracuse.† The
mean number of independent study or reading courses offered in Fall
2000 was 21.9.

Degrees and Certificates Awarded† (Table II-3)

††††††††††† For
Table II-3 schools were asked to report the total number of degrees
and certificates awarded during the 1999-2000 academic year, including
summer sessions, for five degree categories:

∑
Bachelorís

∑
ALA-Accredited Masterís

∑
Other Masterís

∑
Post-Masterís

∑
Doctoral

†††††††††††††††
In supplying these data, schools
were requested to report the number of degrees and certificates aggregated
by the gender and ethnic origin of their graduates.† In reporting ethnic origin the following five
categories, as defined by the US Department of Labor, were to be used.
[1]

AI††††††††††
American Indian or Alaskan Native -- a person having origin
in any of the original peoples of North America, and who maintains
cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition.

AP†††††††††
Asian or Pacific Islander -- a person having origin in any
of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian
subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands.†
This area includes, for example, China, Japan, Korea, the Philippine
Islands, Samoa, and Taiwan.† The Indian subcontinent includes the countries
of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Sikkim, and Bhutan.

B††††††††††††
Black, not of Hispanic Origin -- a person having origin in
any of the black racial groups of Africa.

H††††††††††††
Hispanic -- a person of Cuban, Central or South American, Mexican,
Puerto Rican, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.† Only those persons from Central and South American countries who
are of Spanish origin, descent, or culture should be included in this
category.† Persons from Brazil,
Guyana, Surinam, or Trinidad, for example, would be classified according
to their race and would not necessarily be included in the Hispanic
category.† In addition, the category does not include
persons from Portugal, who would be classified according to race.

W†††††††††††
White, not of Hispanic origin -- a person having origin in
any of the original peoples of Europe, North America, or the Middle
East.

Additionally, two other reporting categories were also
used:

I††††††††††††††
International students -- All students who are not U. S. (or
Canadian, for Canadian schools) citizens, permanent residents, or
landed immigrants.

NA††††††††† Information
not available.† Please use
this category sparingly.† Where
at all possible, report ethnicity.

Canadian
schools were not required to provide ethnic data, although they could
elect to do so.† They were
required, however, to provide totals.

††††††††††† Table II-3-a reports the number of degrees awarded
at each program level distributed by gender and ethnic origin.† Table II-3-a-1 reports these same data for each school.†
A total of 5,999 bachelorís, masterís, post-masterís, and doctoral
degrees were awarded by schools during 1999-2000.†
Female graduates accounted for 72.3 percent of all degrees
awarded.† The male/female distribution
varies considerably among the different degree programs with females
in the majority for three of the five degree programs.†
This ranges from high of 78.7 percent of ALA-accredited masterís
degrees awarded to females to 56.6 and 51.8 percent for doctoral and
post-master's degrees respectively.† The two degrees that have males as the majority
of graduates (ďother masterísĒ (56.9) and bachelorís (54.6)) are those
most likely to be associated with information science

††††††††††† The
figures in Table
II-3-a also demonstrate that graduates of programs offered by
schools continue to be predominately White (71.1 percent).†
Blacks are the next most represented ethnic group (5.3 percent),
followed closely by persons of Hispanic origin (5.1 percent).† These data for Hispanic graduates is 2.3 percentage
points higher than the previous year -- a 82.1 percent increase.†
Asian or Pacific Islanders represented 3 percent of graduates
in 1999-2000.† Native Americans constitute less than one-half percent (0.3) of
graduates of the five degree programs.

††††††††††† Black
graduates accounted for 10.9 percent of bachelorís degrees, 8.2 percent
of post-master's degrees, and 7.2 and 7.1 percent respectively of
doctoral and ďother masterísĒ degrees awarded in 1999-2000.†
The only degree percentage that deviates from this level of
Black student representation is the ALA-accredited masterís.† There Blacks† account for only 4.4 percent of degrees awarded particularly given
the emphasis that the American Library Association has placed over
the past several decades upon recruitment of minority students, and
particularly Blacks, to the profession.

††††††††††† Hispanic
graduation figures are the inverse of those for Blacks.† Hispanics have their highest representation
(5.5 percent) as recipients of the ALA-accredited masterís degree.† Their percentage of graduates drops to 4.5
percent for the bachelorís degree and 3.6 percent for the doctorate.† Persons of Hispanic origin constitute a mere
1.3 percent of ďother masterísĒ degree graduates and 1.2 percent of
those receiving the post-masterís degree.

††††††††††† International
students represent a considerable percentage of graduates of three
of the degree programs.† They
received nearly half (48.2 percent) of post-masterís degrees awarded
in 1999-2000 and nearly a third (31.3 percent) of the doctoral degrees.†
Their representation as graduates of ďother masterísĒ programs
follows closely at 27.4 percent.†
These figures are in marked contrast to international student
graduation figures for the bachelorís degree and ALA-accredited masterís
degrees.† For these programs international students represent
a only 3.2 and 2.9 percent of graduates respectively.

††††††††††† For
each degree program the number of degrees and certificates awarded
varied widely from school-to-school.†
For the 11 schools that awarded bachelorís degrees in 1999-2000
(Table II-3-c-1) Florida State (124), Pittsburgh
(121) and North Texas (102) conferred more than half (57.5 percent)
of the 604 degrees conferred.† Only
Drexel (85) and Syracuse (84) approached that level.†
Together these five schools awarded 85.4 percent of the bachelorís
degrees awarded.† Of the other
six schools only St. Johnís (48) had more than 13 graduates of their
bachelor's program.

††††††††††† At
the ALA-accredited masterís degree level (Table
II-3-c-2) 4,877 degrees were awarded in 1999-2000 compared to
5,046 in 1998-99, continuing a trend observed in three of the past
four reports.† Two schools stand out this year for the number
of graduates:† San Jose (239)
and Simmons (217).† Although
San Jose continues to have the largest number of graduates of this
degree, itís total is considerably lower than the 370 reported for
1998-99.† Six schools had ALA-accredited masterís classes in the 151-200 range:†
Indiana (177), Kent State (169), Long Island (155), Illinois
(154), Texas (152), and South Carolina (151).† This past academic year, as in the previous
year,† 12 schools conferred
fewer than 40 degrees.† Six
of† these 12 schools awarded fewer than 30 ALA-accredited
masterís degrees Ė Hawaii (28), Puerto Rico (26), St. Johnís (26),
Clark Atlanta (24), Dalhousie (19), and McGill (3).† This compares with three schools in the under
30 category last year.

††††††††††† Eleven
schools awarded 350 ďother masterísĒ degrees in 1999-2000.† This is a marked decline from the 500 reported
for the previous year.† The
number of degrees awarded varied widely (Table
II-3-c-3).† Drexel (107)
and Syracuse (101) had by far the most graduates.†
These two schools were responsible for nearly 60 percent (59.4)
of all ďother masterísĒ degrees conferred.†
The next tier of schools were Pittsburgh and Rutgers with 41
and 37 graduate respectively.† Pittsburghís† 41 graduates are a noticeable decline from the 109 it reported for
1998-99.† Four schools conferred
fewer than ten "other master's" degrees:† Albany (5), Alabama (2), St. Johnís (2), and North Carolina Ė Greensboro
(1).

††††††††††† Fifteen
of the 28 schools (53.6 percent) having enrollment in a post-masterís
program in Fall 2000 had graduates of their programs in 1999-2000.† The 85 post-masterís degrees conferred in 1999-2000
(Table II-3-c-4) is in marked contrast
to the 40 reported for 1998-99.† The
number of post-masterís degrees awarded by Syracuse (47) stands out,
as it did last year, representing 55.3 percent of all such degrees
awarded.† The next highest number of post-masterís degrees
awarded was by Florida State (11).†
The remaining 13 schools conferred four of fewer post-masterís
degrees.

††††††††††† Eighty-three
doctoral degrees were conferred by 21 of the 29 schools (72.4 percent)† (Table II-3-c-5)
having enrollment in a doctoral program in Fall 2000.† This number of graduates is a considerable
increase in the 62 and 63 doctoral graduates reported for 1998-99
and 1997-98 respectively.† Three
schools, Pittsburgh (17), Texas (11), and Florida State (9), account
for 44,6† percent of doctoral graduates.† The long duration of doctoral program in can
account for uneven graduation rates for any given school in any single
year.† For example, this past
year only Pittsburgh, of the schools ranked as having the highest
number of doctoral degrees granted in 1998-99, remained in the upper
three of doctoral degree awarding schools.

Enrollment by Gender and Ethnic
Origin† (Table II-4)

††††††††††† Enrollment figures for the 2000 Fall term were
requested for each of the program levels defined for Table II-1 divided
by gender and ethnic origin using the ethnic origin classifications
for Table II-3.

††††††††††† Table
II-4 is similar to Table II-3 in that both deal with distributions
by gender and ethnic origin.† However,
Table II-3 addressed these distributions for graduates of degree programs
while Table II-4 reports enrolled students.

††††††††††† Table II-4-a reports the number
of students enrolled in schools for each program level distributed
by gender and ethnic origin categories.†
These figures show that enrollments remain predominately White
(71.6 percent)
[2]
.† The 1,139 Black students represent the next
largest ethnic group (5.6 percent).†
Hispanic enrollment remains low at 2.6 percent as does Asian
or Pacific Islander representation at 3.6 percent.†
The 94 American Indian students constitute 0.5 percent of total
enrollment.

††††††††††† Table II-4-a-1 reports
student enrollment by ethnic origin for all program levels by school.† In viewing these data one can observe that
Florida State (111) and Syracuse (100) have the highest Black student
enrollment of the 56 schools.† No
other school reports more than 82 Black students.†
Hispanic enrollment is greatest, as one might expect, at Puerto
Rico (94).† It is followed
by schools most of which are located in states with notable Hispanic
populations: Florida State† (55),
South Florida (53), Syracuse (47), San Jose (45), Texas (33), and
North Texas (24).† The next largest Hispanic enrollment is at
Pratt with 19 students.† Drexel
reports a highest Asian or Pacific Islander enrollment with 194 students
followed by Pittsburgh (74), San Jose (62), and Hawaii (60).† The next highest Asian or Pacific Islander enrollment is 36 at North
Carolina Ė Chapel Hill.† The
only school with double digit American Indian enrollment is Oklahoma
(15) followed by Florida State with 9 students.

††††††††††† While
these raw numbers are interesting it is perhaps more informative and
meaningful to look at what percentage students of a particular ethnic
group constitute of a school's total enrollment.†
This might more effectively indicate how a school is meeting
its obligation to provide diversity in its student enrollment.†
When viewed as a percentage of total enrollment, the two historically
Black universities (HBUs), Clark Atlanta and North Carolina Central,
are found to have the largest percentage of Black students at 67.1
and 30.4 percent respectively.† Southern Mississippi, with 23.2 percent Black
enrollment, is followed by Pratt (18.1 percent), and Louisiana State
(18.1 percent).† These are
the only schools whose Black enrollment exceeds, meets, or comes close
to the 2000 population data of the US Census Bureau of Blacks (12.3
percent).
[3]
† Only three other schools (Catholic, Wayne State,
and Florida State) have Black enrollments at 10 percent or higher.

††††††††††† The
2000 census data of the Hispanic population in the US (12.5 percent)
is nearly equaled by only three schools other than Puerto Rico (96.9
percent). -- Arizona (11.9), South Florida and California Ė Los Angeles
(10.8 percent each).† One other school, Texas (9.9), has a Hispanic
enrollments in the 9 percent range.†
Twelve schools, in addition to the University of Hawaii (45,1
percent), have Asian or Pacific Islander student enrollment that exceeds
the 2000 US Census Bureau data for Asian or Pacific Islanders (3.7
percent).† The American Indian census data† of 0.9 percent is equaled or exceeded by only
Oklahoma, North Carolina Central, Arizona, Maryland, California Ė
Los Angeles, and Emporia.† They
are listed in order of decreasing percentage from 7.8 to 1 percent.

††††††††††† Enrollment
at the bachelor's degree level (Table II-4-c-1)
represents the most even distribution of students across the different
ethnic categories in terms of their percentages in the 2000 US population.† At the 12 schools offering a bachelor's degree
who reported ethnic data, White students constitute 65.3 percent of
the enrollment.
[4]
† Black students are 10.3 percent of enrollment
for the bachelorís degree, followed closely by Asian or Pacific Islander
students comprising 10.1 percent.†
Hispanic enrollment remains in single digits at 3.4 percent.

††††††††††† The
ethnic distribution of students pursuing the ALA-accredited masterís
degree is presented for each school in Table
II-4-c-2.† For the 52 schools reporting ethnic data, the
10,062 White students constitute 80.6 percent of the students in those
programs.
[5]
† Black students make up 4.7 percent of that
enrollment, roughly two-fifths of their 12.3 percent of the 2000 US
population determined by the US Census Bureau to be Black.† Hispanic students and Asian or Pacific Islanders comprise 2.8 and
2.5 percent respectively of ALA-accredited masterís enrollment compared
to their 12.5 and 3.7 percents respectively of the 2000 US population.† Based on the comparison of their percentage
of the population to enrollment in ALA-accredited masterís programs,
students of Hispanic origin continue to be the most under-represented
ethnic group, followed by Blacks.
[6]

††††††††††† When
the ethnic composition of each schoolís ALA-accredited masterís enrollment
is examined (Table II-4-c-2), some
interesting distributions become evident.†
Schools with a higher number of Black students (more than 25)
primarily are limited to programs located at historically Black universities
and at universities situated in large metropolitan areas. †Clark
Atlanta and Wayne State have the highest Black enrollment (43 each).† There are six schools in the next tier of Black
enrollment (more than 20 students) -- Pratt (37), North Carolina Central
(33), Catholic and Florida State (27 each), Dominican (26), Queens
(25), Maryland and South Carolina (24 each), and Louisiana State (22).† Nine of the 52 schools (17.3 percent) reporting
ethnic data indicated their Black student enrollment was either zero
or one student.† The two HBUs
that have ALA-accredited master's programs (Clark Atlanta and North
Carolina Central) also have the highest percentage of Black students
in their student body (64.2 and 24.4 percent respectively).†
It is interesting to note that, although an HBU, North Carolina
Central has a White student enrollment of 66.7 percent.†
In terms of Black students constituting a percentage of total
enrollment, following the two HBUs, the next highest percentages are
presents at Southern Mississippi (21.4), Pratt (17.3) Louisiana State
(13.6), Catholic (11.3), and St. Johnís (10).

††††††††††† Figures
for the 353 Hispanic students pursuing the ALA-accredited masterís
degree are unevenly distributed.†
San Jose has the largest Hispanic enrollment with 45 students
followed by South Florida (35), Texas 29, Florida State (27), and
Puerto Rico (24).† There are ten schools reporting ethnic data with no Hispanic students
and seven others with only one Hispanic student each.† Taken together these 17 schools constitute
32.7 percent of schools reporting ethnic data at the ALA-accredited
masterís level.† When viewed
in terms of percentage of total ALA accredited master's enrollment,
Puerto Rico has the highest percentage of Hispanic students (24.7).† Only two other schools have Hispanic enrollments that exceed 10
percent -- South Florida† (12.7)
and California Ė Los Angeles (11.61).

††††††††††† At
the 13 schools that reported enrollment data for their "other
master's" student body (Table II-4-c-3)
White students constitute 57.9 percent of total enrollment.
[7]
† Black students account for 5.2 percent with
Asian or Pacific Islanders comprising the largest non-White ethnic
group at 8.2 percent.† This
is in marked contrast to their percentage (2.8) of the ALA-accredited
masterís enrollment.† Hispanic students are under-represented in
"other master's" programs even more severely than they are
for the ALA-accredited degree representing only 1.8 percent of total
enrollment.† It should be noted that none of the five schools
with the largest Hispanic enrollments for the ALA-accredited master's
degree offer the "other master's" degree.† North Carolina Central† reports
the largest Black enrollment at the ďother masterísĒ level with 20
students followed closely by Drexel with 19.† Only five of the 13 schools reporting ethnic enrollment data indicate
having any Hispanic students in their ďother masterísĒ programs:† North Texas (7), Syracuse (5), Drexel and Rutgers
(4 each), and Pittsburgh (3).† Pittsburgh
has the largest Asian or Pacific Islander enrollment with 45 students.†
Drexel closely follows with 39.†
No other school reported enrolling more than ten Asian or Pacific
Islander students.

††††††††††† White
students constitute 51.2 percent of doctoral student enrollment (Table II-4-c-5) at the schools reporting ethnic data.
[8]
† The lower percentage of White student enrollment
at this program level is not accounted for by increased enrollment
of other US ethnic groups, but rather by the 32.2 percent of total
doctoral enrollment who are international students.†
The 31 Black students comprise 4.6 percent of doctoral enrollment,
while Asian or Pacific Islanders are 3.1 percent and Hispanics 1.5
percent.† Overall, the involvement of all non-White ethnic
groups at the doctoral level is minimal (9.1 percent).† As was the case with the ALA-accredited masterís
degree, the distribution of non-white ethnic groups among the 26 schools
with doctoral programs reporting ethnic enrollment data is uneven.† Rutgers, with five† students, has the largest enrollment of Black doctoral students.†
The schools with the next highest Black doctoral enrollment
are North Carolina Ė Chapel Hill (4), Florida State and Pittsburgh
(3 students each).† Eight schools
report enrollment of only one Black doctoral student and ten schools
report having none.† Texas
indicates that it has four Hispanic doctoral students, while six schools
(Arizona, California Ė Los Angeles, Illinois, Michigan, North Texas
and Texas Womanís) report having one Hispanic doctoral student each.† Nineteen schools reporting ethnic data indicate
that they have no Hispanic doctoral students.† Caution must exerted when evaluating† the percentages of ethnic minority doctoral
students given the number of doctoral programs that are relatively
small in size.† In smaller
programs he presence of one or two students within an ethnic minority
can greatly change a school's ethnic distribution.†
Limiting examination to schools with ten or more doctoral students,
Texas Womanís has the highest percentage of Black doctoral students
with 14.3 percent followed by North Carolina Ė Chapel Hill and Rutgers
with 12.9 and 11.4 percent respectively.†
No other school has more than 10 percent of its doctoral enrollment
as Black.† Again limiting the review to schools with doctoral enrollment of
ten or more students, only one school, Texas (13.8 percent), reports
having more than 10 percent of their doctoral enrollment as Hispanic.† Two schools,† Indiana and Wisconsin Ė Madison (21.1 and 13.3 percent respectively),
indicate having an Asian or Pacific Islander doctoral enrollment exceeding
10 percent.

††††††††††† For Table II-5 schools were
requested to report the number of students officially enrolled in
the Fall 2000 term in relation to the studentsí in-state/in-province
and out-of-state/out-of-province status for each of the program levels
defined for Table II-1.

††††††††††† Tables II-5-c-1 to II-5-c-7 report enrollments for each
program level on a school-by-school basis.†
At the bachelorís degree level (Table
II-5-c-1) the information is less than ideal because, as has been
the case in the past, two of the three schools with the largest bachelorís
programs (Pittsburgh and Syracuse) did not identify the status of
their bachelorís degree students.†
The students in those two programs, numbering 883, account
for 37.9 percent of students in bachelorís programs at the 13 schools.†
For the remaining 11 schools, enrollment at the bachelor's
level reflects what is believed to be typical of enrollment at the
level -- a large proportion of students from in-state (83.2 percent).†
This pattern of in-state/in-province status is true for the
nine public universities and the two private universities providing
data.

††††††††††† At the ALA-accredited masterís degree level (Table II-5-c-2) the data reveal the local or regional
nature of enrollments at most schools.† For the 51 schools that reported the requested data, 81.6 percent
of their students are from in-state/in-province.† Only three schools (Emporia (53.7 percent), Dalhousie (53.2 percent),
and Rhode Island (50 percent)) report more than half of their ALA-accredited
masterís students were from out-of-state/out-of-province.† Four additional schools (Michigan (47.7 percent),
McGill (45.9 percent), Illinois (41.1 percent), and Maryland (41 percent))
indicated that at least 40 percent of their students were from out-of-state/out-of-province.†
Nineteen schools have less than 10 percent of their ALA-accredited
masterís enrollment from out-of-state.†
North Carolina Ė Greensboro (1.7 percent), San Jose (1.4 percent),
Kent State and Southern Connecticut (0.4 percent each) report less
than 2 percent of their enrollment consists of out-of-state students.

††††††††††† Data for "other master's" programs (Table II-5-c-3) encountered a problem similar to that
which occurred with bachelor's degree and ALA-accredited masterís
degree enrollments -- three of the 18 programs (Clark Atlanta, Pittsburgh,
Syracuse) did not provide the in-state/out-of-state status of its
students.† Two of those schools, Pittsburgh and Syracuse,
have a combined enrollment of 538 students that represents 40.1 percent
of all ďother masterísĒ enrollment.†
For the 11 schools that provided data, the percentage of† in‑state ďother masterísĒ students (72.6
percent) is considerably lower than it is for the ALA-accredited masterís
degree (81.6 percent).

††††††††††† Table
II-5-c-5 reports on the in-state/in-province status of doctoral
students.† As has been true
for the other degree programs reported for Table II-5, non-reporting
by a number of schools alters computation of the data.†
Four schools (Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Toronto, and Western Ontario),
whose enrollment of 159 students represents 21.6 of all doctoral student
enrollment, did not report the in-state/in-province status of their
students.† For the remaining 25 schools the data reflect
what one might expect of a research degree -- the willingness of students
to travel out-of-state/out-of-province to pursue their education.† Two-fifths (39.9 percent) of doctoral students
are pursuing their education out-of-state/out-of-province.† One should note that this figure, in fact,† may be low in that it can be affected by the
ability at some schools of students to change their residency status
while enrolled in a program.† Ten
schools (Arizona, Florida State, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan,
Montrťal, Rutgers, Washington, and Wisconsin Ė Madison)) have at least
50 percent of their enrollment from out-of-state.

International Students† (Table
II-6)

††††††††††† For Table II-6 schools were
requested to indicate the number and gender of their international
students officially enrolled in the Fall 2000 term for each of the
program levels defined for Table II-1.

††††††††††† The 1,112 international students at all program levels,
when compared with the enrollment figures reported in Table II-1,
constitute 5.3 percent of students attending the 56 schools.† This year the number of international students remained essentially
the same as it had been in Fall 1999 (1,119).† When individual program levels are examined,
ALA-accredited masterís programs are found to have 3.2 percent of
their students from other countries.†
In contrast international students are a major component of
ďother masterísĒ and doctoral degree programs.†
The 280 international students pursuing ďother masterísĒ degrees
constitute 20.8 percent of that enrollment.†
The presence of international students is even more pronounced
at the doctoral level where the 220 international students comprise
more than a quarter (29.9 percent) of doctoral student enrollment.†
International student enrollment in bachelorís degree programs
remains minimal and has, in fact, declined to 2.6 percent of that
enrollment.† International student participation in post-master's
programs continued its stronger position first observed in 1999.†
The 238 international post-masterís students comprise 24.4
percent of that degreeís enrollment.

††††††††††† Several schools stand out for the number of international
students enrolled in their degree programs (Table
II-6-a-1) -- Syracuse (240), Pittsburgh (151), and Drexel (87).† No other school has more than 60 international
students.† Florida State (59)†
and Illinois (46) comprise the next tier of schools.†
All of the remaining 51 schools have a wide range of international
students -- from 40 at Rutgers to none at Kentucky and Long Island.

††††††††††† When examined at the degree level, some noticeable differences
in international student representation exist (Table II-6-c-2).†
McGill has the highest ALA-accredited master's international
student enrollment (29) followed by Illinois (28), Michigan (27),
and Texas (23).† Eleven other schools have ten or more international
students in their ALA-accredited master's program.

††††††††††† Syracuse has by far the highest international student enrollment
for an "Other Master's" program† with 101 students followed by Pittsburgh with 86 (Table II-6-c-3).†
Drexel has the next highest international student enrollment
with 46 students.† No other
school had more than 17 international ďother masterís students.

††††††††††† International student bachelor's degree enrollment is highest
at Drexel (38) (Table II-6-c-1).† It should be noted that in Fall 1999, Drexelís
international enrollment for the bachelorís degree was followed closely
by that of Syracuse.† For Fall
2000 Syracuse did not submit international student data for the bachelorís
degree.† Other than Florida
State with ten international students, no other bachelorís degree
program has more than 4 international students.†
It is surprising, given Pittsburghís large number of international
students for its ďother masterísĒ program, that its bachelorís degree
program has but four international students.

††††††††††† Pittsburgh, however, continues its strong international
student presence at the doctoral level with 51 international students
(Table II-6-c-5).†
Syracuse is the only other doctoral program with more than
20 international students (22).† Eight
schools report that their doctoral programs have five or fewer international
students.† This is in marked
contrast to Fall 1999 when 17 schools reported doctoral enrollments
in the 1-5 student range.

††††††††††† Historically, and understandably given the relative small
size of their post-masterís programs, schools have had very modest
representation in them by international students.† This continues to be the case in Fall 2000 with one very notable
exception -- Syracuseís 47 international students in its post-masterís
program (Table II-6-c-4).† None of the other eight schools reporting international enrollment
for this degree had more than three international students.† Six reported having one international student.

International Studentsí Country of Origin† (Table II-7)

††††††††††† For Table II-7 schools were
asked to report the country of origin of their international student
enrollment for the 2000 Fall term for each of the program levels defined
for Table II-1.† The data in
Table II-7-a are arranged first
by continent, then sub-arranged alphabetically by country name.† Asia, which covers a wide area of the world
ranging from the Middle East to the Far East, has been further sub-divided
into four regions to allow for more detailed analysis.

††††††††††† As might be expected, international students at schools
represent all continents except Antarctica.†
Asia is the continent that accounts for the majority of international
students, providing two-thirds (66.3 percent) of the 1,112 international
students.† When the regions
of Asia are examined, the Far East/Southeast Asia region is found
to contribute the greatest percentage of international students (50.5
percent).† South Asia is a distant second with 11.1 percent.†
European countries contribute 9.1 percent of international
student enrollment, while South America continues to have minimal
representation in LIS programs contributing only 2.6 percent.†
Equally low is Africa with 4.4 percent.†
Australia has the lowest level of international students representation
with 0.2 percent (2 students).

††††††††††† When the number of students from individual countries is
examined, it becomes readily apparent that China, South Korea, and
India are the countries providing the greatest number of international
students (245, 125, and 110 respectively).†
Although Chinese enrollment figures have been the highest of
all countries for a number of years, they are particularly noteworthy
this year experiencing a 25 percent increase over last year.†
Two other Asian countries, Taiwan (66) and Thailand (54), form
the next tier of countries contributing the most students.†
As was the case with China, these four countries have provided
strong student presence for several years.†
Also, as was the case with China, they experienced considerable
change in their student representation this past year.†
Indiaís enrollment increased 37.5 percent, while Taiwanís decreased
21.4 and Thailandís 14.3 percent.†
Overall, combined enrollments for these five countries contribute
half (53.9 percent) of all international student enrollment.†
A figure similar to that of last year.

††††††††††† Given the relatively small international student enrollment
in bachelor's degree programs (60), it is not surprising that no country
has a large number of students represented in these programs.† In fact, no country has more than 2 students
enrolled.† It should be noted,
however, that nearly two-thirds (63.3 percent) of the 60 bachelorís
degree students are categorized as ďunknownĒ in terms of country of
origin.† This may very likely be do to student record
access limitations by schools for their undergraduate students.† China (111) by far provides the greatest number
of international students pursuing the ALA-accredited masterís degree.† South Korea (38), India and Japan (26 each),
and Taiwan (19) have the next largest representation when US enrollment
in Canadian schools and Canadian enrollment in US schools is discounted.† No other country provides more than 10 students
for this degree.† China also
provides the largest number of ďother masterísĒ international students
(58) followed by India (47), and South Korea (29).†
International doctoral student enrollment is led by China and
South Korea (43 students each) distantly followed by Thailand with
21.† No other country sends more than 14 doctoral
students to US or Canadian schools.

Enrollment by Age and Gender†
(Table II-8)

††††††††††† For Table II-8 schools were asked to report Fall 2000 enrollment divided
by gender across nine age groups for each of the program levels defined
for Table II-1.

††††††††††† Table II-8-a
provides a summary for all program levels by age group and gender.†
Although the data in this table are incomplete due to the relatively
large number of schools that were unable to provide age data (13.1
percent of the students could not be classified by age), they nonetheless
provide some insight into the age distribution of students at schools.
[9]

††††††††††† For the ALA-accredited masterís and ďother masterísĒ programs,
the 25-29 age group has by far the greatest percentage of students
(23.8 and 30.8 percent respectively).†
The 25-29 age group also had the highest percentage of post-masterís
students (22.5).† This figure
though is skewed by the 33 of the total 84†
post-masterís students in that age group reported by Syracuse.† If† the
Syracuse enrollment is removed from the calculation, then the 45-49
age group accounts for the largest percentage of students (21.4).† The remaining students are distributed rather
evenly across the 30-54 age range.†
Overall, doctoral students are quite evenly divided among the
six age groups 25-54 except for the 30-34 age group.†
That group with 144† students
accounts for 19.7 percent of doctoral enrollment.† The other age groups 25-49 have between† 80 and 108 students with a percentage range of 12.4 to 14.8.

Students by Gender and Highest Degree Held† (Table II-9)

††††††††††† This table is not currently
in use.† The table was last
used in 1980.

Students by Undergraduate Major, Gender and Program Level† (Table II-10)

††††††††††† This table is not currently
in use.† The table was last
used in 1980.

Scholarship and Fellowship Aid† (Table
II-11)

††††††††††† Data for the number and amount
of scholarship or other non-work-related financial aid awarded in
fiscal year 1999-2000 were requested for each of the seven program
levels as defined for Table II-1.†
Each school was asked to separate the data by the gender of
awardees.† The instructions for compiling the data stated that awards directly
administered by the school (regardless of whether the funds were from
the school, the parent institution, federal or non-federal external
sources) were to be included in the report, but awards (including
assistantships and work/study) made by outside sources directly to
the student were to be excluded.†
Additionally, schools were asked to indicate whether they offered
scholarship and fellowship aid to part-time students.

††††††††††† Given the difference in the value of Canadian and US dollars,
separate means are provided for Canadian and US schools.† In comparing Canadian and US figures it may
be convenient to use the exchange rate given in the footnote below.
[10]
Similarly, with the costs associated with attending
a public university generally being quite different from those at
a private university,it is reasonable to suspect that the amount
of financial aid awarded by these different types of schools would
also differ.† Accordingly,
for US schools, separate means are reported for public and private
universities as well as a combined mean.
[11]

††††††††††† Table
II-11-a provides a summary of aid awarded for each of the seven
program levels for the 1999-2000 fiscal year. The total value of awards,
$6,380,719, represents a 2.9 percent increase in funding over 1998-99
and follows upon a 1.9 percent increase in 1997-98.†
The amount of money invested in doctoral students this year
($1,055,884) represents a 7.3 percent increase offsetting an annual
decline in doctoral funding first noted in 1997-98.†
The total for ALA-accredited degree funding increased as did
the funding for post-masterís students.†
Funding increases for scholarships and fellowships was not
true for all degree levels.† ďOtherís masterísĒ student funding declined
30.4 percent this year.

.

††††††††††† Schools also were asked whether they provided scholarship
and fellowship aid to part-time students.†
This was a general question not limited to any specific degree.† Thirty-one of the 50 schools (60.8 percent)
that responded to this question indicated that such aid is available
for part-time students (Table-II-11-a-2).†
Three of the 7 Canadian schools (42.9 percent) provide this
type of aid compared to 72.7 percent of US schools.†
Private US universities make scholarships and fellowship aid
available to part-time students to a greater degree than do US public
universities (85.7 vs. 59.4 percent respectively).

††††††††††† Table
II-11-c-2 reports scholarship and fellowship aid for the ALA-accredited
masterís degree.† The mean
number of awards given by Canadian and US schools was reverse this
year over past years (28 vs. 23.8 respectively).†
This represents an increase†
in the mean number awarded by Canadian schools compared to
last year and a decrease in the mean number by US schools.†
The mean amount awarded was $2,416 per Canadian school ($1,570
USD)† This†
compares to $3,270 per US public university and $3,478 per
US private university.

††††††††††† The figures in Table II-11-c-3 for ďother masterísĒ is very† informative in providing the number of schools
that did not report any scholarship or fellowship aid for students
pursuing these degrees.† Only
six of 14 schools reporting enrollment in these programs (42.9 percent)
indicate any funding for these students.†
The mean amount awarded was $3,383 per Canadian school ($2,198
USD) compared to $10,385 per US public university and $7,993 per US
private university. -- a sizeable difference between the two types
of US schools and an even greater difference for Canadian schools.

††††††††††† Financial support of post-master students continues to be
limited, but witnessed a marked increase.†
It rose from† $3,950
awarded in 1998-99 to $165,779 in 1999-2000 -- a 4,200 percent increase
(Table II-11-c-4).†
This increase is attributable to both an increase in the number
of schools providing support from two to five and an increase in the
amount of money provided.† Most
notable is the $115,648 reported by Drexel for scholarship or fellowship
aid for its post-masterís students.

††††††††††† Table
II-11-c-5 reports on scholarship and fellowship aid for doctoral
students.† On average a doctoral
student at a Canadian university receives an award of $9,955 ($6,469
USD) compared to $6,888 for the average doctoral award at a US university.† The average size of a scholarship or fellowship
award from a private US university is $9,871 compared to a similar
average award at a public university of $6,492.† There has been a noticeable decline in the average size of a doctoral
award from $12,326 in 1996-97, to $9,174 in 1997-98, $7,812 in 1998-99,
down to $6,888 in 1999-2000.† This
represents a† 44.2 percent
reduction over that four year period.†
This decline is most likely attributable to the withdrawal
of much US federal support for doctoral students in library and information
science.

Assistantships† (Table II-12)

††††††††††††††† Data were requested for the number and value of assistantships
awarded by each school, divided by the gender of the awardee, using
the program level definitions of Table II-1 for students enrolled
in Fall 2000.† Similar to the
reporting for Table II-11 the presentations of Table-II-12 include
a calculation of separate means for Canadian and US schools, with
a further division of US schools into public and private institutions.†
In comparing Canadian and US figures it may be convenient to
use the exchange rate given in the footnote below.
[12]

††††††††††† Table
II-12-a provides a summary of assistantships awarded for each
of the seven program levels for students enrolled in Fall 2000. The
total value of awards, $12,415,838, represents a 12.2 percent increase
in funding over that reported last year.

††††††††††† As was the case for scholarships and fellowship aid, schools
were asked whether they provided assistantships to part-time students.†
This was a general question not limited to any specific degree.†
Fifteen of the 50 schools (30 percent) that responded to this
question indicated that assistantships were available for part-time
students (Table-II-12-a-2).† The availability of assistantships for part-time students is not
nearly as great as it is for scholarship and fellowship aid for those
students (60.8 percent) noted previously (Table II-11).†
The awarding of assistantships to part-time students at US
private and public universities varies (37.5 vs. 25.7 percent respectively).
[13]
† Although the pattern is the same, there is
a notable contrast in the percentage of scholarship and fellowship
aid available part-time students at these two types of US universities
(85.8 and 59.4 respectively).

††††††††††† Table
II-12-c-2 reports assistantships awarded to students in ALA-accredited
masterís degree programs.† The
mean number of awards given by Canadian and US schools is quite different
(7 vs. 19.2 respectively).† While
scholarships and fellowships on average
were awarded at about the same level by US public and US private schools
(28.6 and 25.9 respectively), US public universities awarded an average
of 21.6 assistantships per school compared to 7
by US private schools.† Differences
in the mean amount of an assistantship awarded by a Canadian school
versus a US school for students continue:†
$2,328 ($1,513 USD) compared to $12,214 -- $12,389 public,
$9,869 private).

††††††††††† The figures in Table II-12-c-3 for ďother masterísĒ degrees, as was
the case with scholarship and fellowship aid, is informative for the
continued increase in the number of schools that reported assistantship
funding for these students.† This
year 11 schools offer such assistance compared to ten last year.

††††††††††† Similar to the case for scholarship and fellowship aid,
assistantship support of post-masterís students is† limited in terms of the number of schools that provide it.† Only five of the 28 schools (17.9 percent)
that had post-masterís enrollment in Fall 2000 reported that they
provided such aid (Table II-12-c-4).

††††††††††† Table
II-12-c-5 reports the number and value of assistantships awarded
doctoral students enrolled in Fall 2000.†
There continues to be a difference in the mean number of assistantships
awarded by Canadian versus US universities (6.3 and 8.3 respectively).† That difference is more extreme in terms of
the average size of an assistantship award -- $3,262 Canadian ($2,120
USD) vs. $14,368 for the US.† There
are differences in the average number of assistantships awarded to
doctoral students at US public and private universities (8.4 vs. 7.0
respectively).† There is also a $2,100 difference in the value
of an average award between the two types of universities -- $14,236
public vs. $16,386 private.

Tuition and Fees† (Table II-13)

††††††††††† Tuition and fee data for the 2000 fall term were requested.† These data included

∑Total cost of a degree obtained without
transfer credit

∑Cost of tuition only for one credit

In reporting fees schools were
asked not to include those fees associated with particular courses
or labs.† Data were requested
separately for in-state/in-province and out-of-state/out-of-province
students for each of the seven program levels defined for Table II-1.

††††††††††† Given the difference in the value of the Canadian and US
dollars, separate means are provided for Canadian and US schools.† In comparing Canadian and US figures it may
be convenient to use the exchange rate given in the footnote below.
[14]
† Differences between in-state and out-of-state
charges are valid only for public universities in the United States.†
Private universities charge the same fee regardless of residency
status.
[15]

††††††††††† Table
II-13-c-2 presents the full degree costs and tuition for one-credit
for the ALA-accredited masterís degree.†
As expected, the cost for the degree in the US is generally
higher at private schools with a mean cost of $22,503
[16]
compared to $7,269 for in-state and $18,364 for
out-of-state students at public universities†
The least expensive ALA-accredited masterís programs at private
universities are provided by Clark Atlanta ($16,092), Dominican ($18,000),
and Long Island ($19,116).† The most expensive programs are offered by
Catholic ($29,688) and Drexel ($28,320).†
One might expect that the cost of obtaining an ALA-accredited
master's degree at a private US university would be higher than at
any of the† 41 US public schools at an in-state tuition
level.† This is the true except
for Michigan where in-state tuition and fees ($21,642) is close to
the mean cost of a degree at a private university ($22,503).

††††††††††† Four schools (Puerto Rico ($3,325), North Carolina Central
($3,489), Southern Mississippi ($3,968), and Oklahoma ($3,999)) are
able to offer the ALA-accredited masterís degree to their in-state
students for under $4,000.† Ten
schools can provide this degree to in-state residents for less than
$5,000.† The most expensive programs for in-state students
are at Wisconsin Ė Madison ($11,773), Pittsburgh ($14,529), and Michigan
($21,642).

††††††††††† Out-of-state students are able to obtain the ALA-accredited
masterís degree for under $11,000 at three schools:† Southern Mississippi ($7,896), Clarion ($10,512), and Oklahoma ($10,785).†
There are ten US public universities that have out-of-state
tuition and fees exceeding $20,000.† Of these the most noticeable are Wisconsin
Ė Milwaukee ($35,500), Wisconsin Ė Madison ($37,193), and Michigan
($43,498). -- all three well above the mean cost of this degree for
both out-of-state students at public universities ($18,364) and students
at private universities ($22,503).†
Viewed from the financial aspect only, it appears that private
universities are competitive for out-of-state students in their costs
to degree with a number of public universities.

††††††††††† Table
II-13-c-5 provides tuition and fee information for the doctoral
degree.† Schools were requested
to report only the cost for course work.†
The mean cost to an in-state doctoral student at a US public
university is $13,808.† The
least expensive US public university programs for in-state doctoral
students are provided by Florida State ($3,669), California Ė Los
Angeles ($4.504), Texas Womanís ($5,260), and Emporia ($5,865).†
In-state doctoral students encounter the highest cost to degree
is at Michigan ($46,219).† That figure is more than $21,500 higher than
the cost at the next most expensive program (Illinois, $24,544).† For out-of-state students, the doctoral programs
with the lowest degree costs are at Florida State ($12,760) and Texas
Womanís ($13,048).† Three programs,
Emporia, Texas, and California Ė Los Angeles, have costs to degree
in the $14,000 range.† The
most expensive programs for out-of-state doctoral students is at Michigan
($79,003) followed distantly by Illinois ($54,584).†
Two schools, Tennessee and Pittsburgh, have costs to degree
in the $40,000 range.† The
costs at all four schools are well above the out-of-state mean for
US public universities ($29,294).

††††††††††† Doctoral programs at
private US schools are considerably more expensive than similar programs
at most public universities.† Only
four of the 28 doctoral programs in the US are offered by private
universities (Drexel, Long Island, Simmons, and Syracuse).†
Their mean cost to degree is $35,782, with a range from $22,932† (Simmons) to $47,814 (Syracuse).

[1]
† For ease of reading the following terms are used in this chapter:† White, Black, Hispanic, Asian or Pacific Islander,
and American Indian.

[2]
† In calculating the percentages in this paragraph, the total enrollment
figures reported by the 5 Canadian schools that did not report ethnic
data were not included.† Thus
a divisor of 20,275 was used in the calculation rather than the
total enrollment of 21,115 reported in Table II-4-a-1.

[4]
† In calculating the percentages in this paragraph, the total enrollment
figures reported by the 1 Canadian school that did not report ethnic
data were not included.† Thus
a divisor of 2,242 was used in the calculation rather than the total
enrollment of 2,330 reported in Table II-4-c-1.

[5]
† In calculating the percentages in this paragraph, the total enrollment
figures reported by the 4 Canadian†
schools that did not report ethnic data were not included.† Thus a divisor of 12,479 was used in the calculation
rather than the total enrollment of 13,479 reported in Table II-4-c-2.

[6]
† In calculating the percentages in this paragraph, the total enrollment
figures reported by the 5 schools that did not report ethnic data
were not included.† Thus
a divisor of 11,392 was used in the calculation rather than the
total enrollment of 12,067 reported in Table II-4-c-2.

[7]
† In calculating the percentages in this paragraph, the total enrollment
figures reported by the 1 Canadian school that did not report ethnic
data were not included.† Thus
a divisor of 1,296 was used in the calculation rather than the total
enrollment of 1,343 reported in Table II-4-c-3.

[8]
† In calculating the percentages in this paragraph, the total enrollment
figures reported by the 3 Canadian schools that did not report ethnic
data were not included.† Thus
a divisor of 680 was used in the calculation rather than the total
enrollment of 735 reported in Table II-4-c-5.

[9]
† In calculating the percentages of students in age groups for the discussion
in this section, the following was used as the divisor for each
degree level (Total - NA).† Thus,
the divisor 18,348 was used rather than the total, 21,115, reported
in Table II-8-a.† The percentages
used are for students for whom age was known.†
rather than the percentage of all students.†
Similarly, the Total-NA formula was also applied when computing
percentages for individual degree programs.

[11]
† The following nine universities were defined as
private:† Catholic, Clark
Atlanta, Dominican, Drexel, Long Island, Pratt, St. Johnís, Simmons,
and Syracuse.† Some schools treated as public have a quasi
public/private relationship.† For
the purposes of this report, if such a school had different tuition
levels for in-state versus out-of-state students it was classified
as a public university.† When
viewing this definition against the tuition and fee tables it would
appear that one exception had been made for Catholic, which is clearly
a private school but which does have a different tuition structure
in the tables for "in-state" and "out-of-state."†
Although recorded this way in the tables those figures, as
reported by Catholic, actually represent a difference in tuition
structure for "on campus" and "off campus."

[13]
† The following nine universities were defined as
private:† Catholic, Clark
Atlanta, Dominican, Drexel, Long Island, Pratt, St. Johnís, Simmons,
and Syracuse.† Some schools treated as public have a quasi
public/private relationship.† For
the purposes of this report, if such a school had different tuition
levels for in-state versus out-of-state students it was classified
as a public university.† When
viewing this definition against the tuition and fee tables it would
appear that one exception had been made for Catholic, which is clearly
a private school but which does have a different tuition structure
in the tables for "in-state" and "out-of-state."† Although recorded this way in the tables those figures, as reported
by Catholic, actually represent a difference in tuition structure
for "on campus" and "off campus."

[15]
† The following nine universities were defined as
private:† Catholic, Clark
Atlanta, Dominican, Drexel, Long Island, Pratt, St. Johnís, Simmons,
and Syracuse.† Some schools treated as public have a quasi
public/private relationship.† For
the purposes of this report, if such a school had different tuition
levels for in-state versus out-of-state students it was classified
as a public university.† When viewing this definition against the tuition
and fee tables it would appear that one exception had been made
for Catholic, which is clearly a private school but which does have
a different tuition structure in the tables for "in-state"
and "out-of-state."† Although recorded this way in the tables those
figures, as reported by Catholic, actually represent a difference
in tuition structure for "on campus" and "off campus."

[16]
† The difference in the total and mean for private US universities is attributable
to Catholic having different tuition and fees rate for on and off
campus status which the school reports each year as in-state and
out-of-state.